Tuesday, August 01, 2006

Yesterday a Federal District Court Judge James M. Rosenbaum ruled that the Minnesota Restricted Video Games Act is unconstitutional. Specifically the judge ruled that the State of Minnesota has not proven violent video games lead to violent behavior. Here are some quotes from the ruling:

The State’s concerns are inchoate. It is impossible to determine from the data presented whether violent video games cause violence, or whether violent individuals are attracted to violent video games.

Further, there is no showing whatsoever that video games, in the absence of other violent media, cause even the slightest injury to children.

GamePolitics.com reports (via St. Paul Pioneer-Press) on the reaction to that ruling from various Minnesota legislators.

"The whole ruling defied common sense. I am so disappointed. The federal court said we don't have a right to protect our children, but we protect our children from other things. We don't let them smoke or buy liquor. You score points (in video games) for how many women you rape, how many cops you kill. How could that not affect them psychologically?"

Say what?

She's, of course, talking about Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, the current favorite whipping boy of politicians and insane lawyers from Miami. The problem is that's not what the game is about. You don't get more points for raping women or killing cops. In fact, you get into quite a lot of trouble (in the GTA game world) for killing cops. Furthermore smoking and alcohol have known and PROVEN negative effects to the well being of children. Somehow she failed to notice the part of the ruling that stated there is no evidence that says video games are harmful to kids.

Maybe the good Senator would like to also introduce bills protecting children from the baby-eating monsters that live under every child's bed. They are, after all, just as real as the video games she's trying to protect children from.